Dave G Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 dawki - 2010-08-08 7:09 AM Yeah its Merc for me to. I also have the 315 Sprinter David and it just gets better with every passing mile. I know most people are not looking to do very high milage in there vans but anybody who has been to an auction and watched the buyers scramble around and pay crazy money for a high milage Merc rather thah buy other vans. cant all be wrong cheers Dawki Couldn't agree more about the 315 Dawki, mine's on an automatic box. It's a real joy to drive, I just sit back and let the miles roll by. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keithl Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Dave G - 2010-08-08 6:46 AM Keith, that has me confused as my 315 was built in September 2008 is a 150 hp Euro 4 engine and was 3880kg as supplied. I have now had it up-rated to 4 tonne by sv-tech without any alterations other than the paper work which would I suppose mean that the chassis was originally more than 3 tonne surely. Dave, Sorry to hijack the thread but to try and explain quickly the way that uprates are normally done. As the vehicle is sold the sum of the 2 individual axle weights will be greater than the maximum permitted weight to allow for load distribution. So all SV Tech do is increase the MTPLM to the sum of the individual axle weights, simple really. If you look at your old and new VIN plates you should what they have done. So to answer your question the chassis was only rated at a nominal 3 Tonne when sold but was not then using the full loading allowance for each axle. Keith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Pursuing the OT a bit, for which I apologise, many, though by no means all, vans will reach the permissible maximum load on one, or other, of their axles, before they reach their MAM. If this van was uprated from 3,880kg to 4,000kg, the gain was only 120kg, which is really quite small (about 3% of the original MAM). If the reason for the upgrade was that the van was already close to its MAM of 3,880kg, and all SVTech have done is literally sum the two axle maxima to achieve 4,000kg, it seems quite likely that one of the axles (rear?) was, and probably still is at, or above, its permissible limit. Has this been checked against the VIN plate in addition to checking the MAM? Since this also bears upon the suitability of the tyres at any higher load, increased risk of blowout is a possibility.Also, 3,880kg is an odd MAM to be starting from. Has this already been uprated during conversion to a motorhome, or at some later date? It suggests to me a 3,500kg chassis with the MAM uprated by agreement with Mercedes at the time of conversion. Whose plate actually allocates the 3,880kg MAM - Mercedes', or the converter's? Were Mercedes consulted as to the desirability of this uprating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave G Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 There was only the one rating plate and that was the mercedes one for 3880kg, Brian. The axle loadings are given as front axle 1800 and the rear axle 2430. I would image that the base vehicle was originally 4 tonnes. sv-tech therefore didn't have to think about whether to uprate or not having been given the all information including tyre sizes etc it merely became a paper exercise for them. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Ah, so if SV Tech had merely added the two axle maxima together you would have had 4,230kg, which makes more sense. At least you still have a working reserve. Have they supplied a new plate at 4,000kg? If not, and you are check weighed at over 3,880, a mere piece of paper may not satisfy VOSA. After all, with computers and home printers, anyone can produce a convincing piece of paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave G Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 SV Tech supplied the new plate albeit a stick on type with all the relevant paperwork to verify the same, the new V5 came a few days later. Instructions to fit the new plate and the positioning of it were included. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vernon B Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Brian Kirby - 2010-07-31 5:39 PM The downside to the Merc, IMO, is its relatively narrow track when surmounted by an A class body. It just looks wrong, which persuades me it must be (very basic engineering principle I am not qualified to apply :-D). However, there are now some AlKo RWD wide rear track chassis around, though I do not know if Hymer are building on them. So that's half the problem solved - all they have to fix now is the front end! Very interesting thread. There haven't been that many threads on Merc platforms compared with Fiat - and the Mercedes website is even less revealing! Brian's observations give me an opportunity to raise another point. I took delivery of a Frankia A class last November spec'd with a wide rear asle Alko chassis - amongst other things to accommodate the double floor. I'd expected this to be the Alko"standard" chassis with torsion bar suspension as fitted to my previous Pilote Galaxy. I was surprised to find however that this was a much more substantial looking piece of ironwork which incorporates swing arms with coil springs and an heavy duty anti-roll bar. It is rated as 3880t. My "surprise" was compounded by a subsequent visit to Towtal in S-o-T for a tow bar to be fitted. The resident expert there said this design was new and he'd only seen it before at an exhibition in Germany. He told me it was Alko with the rear suspension sauced from VW!?# Anyway if anyone has any more details I'd be very interested. Again the Alko website is silent on the matter and there's no longer a phone number for their technical department - was going to follow it up at the next show. Perhaps I should add that, for me, the chassis appears to ride firmer than the standard Merc offering but it is not quite as sure footed as the set-up on the former Pilote nor the camping option on the X250. V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 This is the third thread mentioning 3880MAM for Merc, on one derek posted some links. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vernon B Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 colin - 2010-08-09 2:20 PM This is the third thread mentioning 3880MAM for Merc, on one derek posted some links. So ... What's that got to do with the price of fish Colin? V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altona56 Posted August 9, 2010 Author Share Posted August 9, 2010 (lol) Colin, you are quick! (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjmike Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Having a 315 based Pilote I have read this thread with great interest. The van is now three years old and has been relatively trouble free, the exception being returning from a May bankholiday trip we suddenly lost power. This resulted in a long and drawn out altercation with the RAC which I won't go into now. The fault was diagnosed as a collapsed turbo to intercooler pipe, local MB dealer gave the van a good inspection but were stumped as to why it failed (£100 cost to me to find this out). As there seemed to be no reason as to why this item failed I now carry a spare pipe. One item to keep an eye on and its not mentioned in the handbook is the power steering fluid level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Vernon B - 2010-08-09 4:19 PM colin - 2010-08-09 2:20 PM This is the third thread mentioning 3880MAM for Merc, on one derek posted some links. So ... What's that got to do with the price of fish Colin? V The 3880 has been quiried as being an odd MAM not for the first time by the same person, just a gentle reminder for him ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Dave G - 2010-08-09 7:07 AM SV Tech supplied the new plate albeit a stick on type with all the relevant paperwork to verify the same, the new V5 came a few days later. Instructions to fit the new plate and the positioning of it were included. Dave Job done then! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 colin - 2010-08-09 8:01 PM ............. The 3880 has been quiried as being an odd MAM not for the first time by the same person, just a gentle reminder for him ;-) Thank you for the reminder Colin. I'll try to remember, though it seems the new Sprinters don't run at that MAM - so I'll probably forget again! I guess no particular number of kg is truly logical, but 3,880 just strikes me as odder than 3,850. What is the commercial value of the extra 30kg? Anyone know? I may be able to remember it then. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flicka Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Brian Kirby - 2010-08-09 9:49 PMcolin - 2010-08-09 8:01 PM ............. The 3880 has been quiried as being an odd MAM not for the first time by the same person, just a gentle reminder for him ;-) Thank you for the reminder Colin. I'll try to remember, though it seems the new Sprinters don't run at that MAM - so I'll probably forget again! I guess no particular number of kg is truly logical, but 3,880 just strikes me as odder than 3,850. What is the commercial value of the extra 30kg? Anyone know? I may be able to remember it then. :-D2 full x 6kg Calor Gas Bottles :D :D :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Nah, can't be gas John, ours is only 3,500kg and it carries 2 x 13kg LPG. Do Mercedes drivers drink a lot of beer? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flicka Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Hi Brian, Quess that's a question for Clive, but him being an international Playboy, my quess is it's magnums of Champagne. >:-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave G Posted August 10, 2010 Share Posted August 10, 2010 Beer? Brian. In a mercedes? Gin and Tonic surely? Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted August 10, 2010 Share Posted August 10, 2010 Ooops! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted August 10, 2010 Share Posted August 10, 2010 Could be! You'd get quite a few G&Ts for 30 kg - er, I imagine officer! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan k Posted August 10, 2010 Share Posted August 10, 2010 I believe the 3880kg is the sum of the front and rear axles. I can't check without moving the car and the van to get into the van's drivers door to look at the plate alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekfaeberwick Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 alan k - 2010-08-10 7:28 PMI believe the 3880kg is the sum of the front and rear axles.I can't check without moving the car and the van to get into the van's drivers door to look at the platealan Nah, 3,880 is an option with my van, it's not popular really as you lose all the benefits of 3,500 kg without much real gain. P.S. This Merc driver does drink lots of beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekfaeberwick Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 The 316 5 cylinder 3.5 tonne chassis was superceded by the V6 318 surely, not the 315. The O.P. was asking the relative merits of the older 2.9 litre Merc versus the older Fiat of the same era. In my opinion the Merc wins hands down for reliability and slogging power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altona56 Posted August 16, 2010 Author Share Posted August 16, 2010 Derek - you and all the other contributers have made me decide for the Hymer S700 auto, 1999 reg. I hope to collect it from London in 14 Days. Than the hopefully enjoyable 2700 km back to the Algarve. Thanks to you all. End of this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syd Posted August 17, 2010 Share Posted August 17, 2010 derekfaeberwick - 2010-08-16 9:31 PM The 316 5 cylinder 3.5 tonne chassis was superceded by the V6 318 surely, not the 315. The O.P. was asking the relative merits of the older 2.9 litre Merc versus the older Fiat of the same era. In my opinion the Merc wins hands down for reliability and slogging power.Here Here, Every time, without any doubt what-so-ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.